How withdrawal of Sahel nations from ICC undermines global justice
Sahel nations’ withdrawal from the International Criminal Court: a blow to justice for victims
The Global Initiative Against Impunity (GIAI) – a coalition including prominent human rights organizations such as the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC), Redress, Trial International, and Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice (WIGJ) – has strongly condemned the announced withdrawal of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). This move represents a significant setback that undermines decades of African leadership in the global fight against impunity. It not only weakens the ICC but also jeopardizes the broader project of international justice at a time when unity is more crucial than ever.
Withdrawal takes effect only after a year-long process
On September 22, the three member states of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) – Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger – declared their intention to withdraw from the ICC, claiming this decision would take immediate effect. However, according to Article 127 of the Rome Statute, a state must submit a formal written notification to the United Nations Secretary-General, and the withdrawal only becomes effective one year after this notification. Until then, Sahel nations remain fully bound by their obligations under the Rome Statute, including the duty to cooperate with the Court. Importantly, the withdrawal does not affect ongoing proceedings for crimes committed before the effective date of withdrawal.
Currently, cases related to the situation in Mali – referred to the Court by the Malian government in July 2012 – are actively being heard. The reparations process in the Al Mahdi case is nearing completion. Al Mahdi was convicted on September 27, 2016 for intentionally directing attacks against religious and historical buildings in Timbuktu. Additionally, the Court is expected to deliver a decision on reparations in the Al Hassan case within the coming months, following his conviction on June 26, 2024 for war crimes and crimes against humanity also committed in Timbuktu. A warrant of arrest also remains active against Iyad Ag Ghaly, the alleged leader of Ansar Dine, a jihadist group active in Mali.
From leadership to withdrawal: victims abandoned
African states played a pivotal role in establishing the ICC in 1998, widely ratifying the Rome Statute and even referring domestic situations to the Court. This commitment provided victims of the gravest crimes with a vital international ally when justice was unattainable at the national level. The announced withdrawal contradicts this legacy of leadership, leaving victims with fewer avenues to seek justice.
This decision follows the three states’ exit from ECOWAS in January 2025, another institution they helped shape and which has a strong track record in human rights through its Community Court of Justice. These withdrawals mark a regression in the fight against impunity, leaving victims without recourse, weakening human rights protections, and increasing isolation at a time when regional and international cooperation are essential. This is particularly critical in countries grappling with atrocities linked to terrorism.
“The decision to withdraw from the ICC weakens the situation of victims, for whom the Court often represents their last hope for justice. After their departure from ECOWAS, the loss of ICC protection leaves victims in Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger without recourse for the most severe human rights violations they continue to endure,” stated Drissa Traoré, Secretary-General of FIDH. “In these countries facing multidimensional crises, national courts are still unable to provide justice and reparations to victims due to a lack of political will and an inability to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
A threat to vulnerable international justice
The announcement comes as international justice faces mounting pressures. Earlier this year, Hungary also signaled its intention to leave the Rome Statute, a move widely criticized for undermining the global fight against impunity.
While the ICC has faced criticism in the past for the selectivity of cases and its perceived overemphasis on Africa, the Court has made strides in broadening its mandate beyond the continent. It is currently investigating and pursuing cases in Afghanistan, Bangladesh/Myanmar, Palestine, Ukraine, Venezuela, Libya, and the Philippines. Recent arrests, including of Libyan suspects and former President Rodrigo Duterte, demonstrate that no region or high-ranking official is beyond the reach of justice. This growing universality strengthens the Court’s legitimacy but also makes it more vulnerable to political attacks.
“State parties must demonstrate resilience and reaffirm their commitment to the Court, the fight against impunity, and the rights of victims worldwide,” emphasized Alix Vuillemin, Executive Director of Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice (WIGJ). “At a time when the Court faces increasing attacks, states must advance toward universality, not retreat. Turning away now only reinforces impunity.”
The critical role of states in preserving international norms
The ICC plays a significant role in international justice, complementing existing mechanisms such as truth-seeking processes and transitional justice initiatives essential for sustainable peace. The Rome Statute enshrines key principles that underpin international justice: no immunity for heads of state, complementarity with national jurisdictions, and victims’ rights to participate in judicial processes and seek reparations. Withdrawing from the Statute risks weakening these protections at the national level and compromising decades of progress in establishing global anti-impunity norms.
GIAI urges all ICC state parties to reaffirm their commitment to the Rome Statute. As victims in Africa and worldwide face escalating violence, preserving the ICC as a court of last resort is essential.
